faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
|
Some suggestions
by Bob on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @07:42
|
I don't like saying this (I realise dot threads are getting ruled by trolls) but the logos are very unrecognisable and really don't communicate anything to me. The Koffice one is OK as a logo (I would prefer some hint that it is an office application if it were used as an icon) but the other ones don't really look like anything but a bunch of strange symbols.
It would be OK if there was only a couple of extra logos, but there are so many, they all look very similar and they don't communicate even the name of application, let alone what it does. This makes them very forgettable once you figure out what they are too. For instance, the Kugar one doesn't even look like a K or anything to me really; it looks a bit like a rotated fast forward sign with the chunk removed. How am I suppose to work out the difference between the Kugar and Kforumla logo by looking at them or remember which is which without serious effort?
I'm very confused by the logo/icon comments; why would you want a logo for an application that is different to its icon? That would just be confusing and dilutes your branding.
To improve each logo/icon I would do either or both of these:
* include something that indicates what the app does (e.g. a spreadsheet symbol in the kspread logo), like the openoffice icons.
* incorporate the whole name of the application into the logo, not just one letter or a bit of one letter.
Please don't flame me. I've explained what I don't like, the reason why and have suggested improvements. Feel free to ignore my comments. |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Boudewijn Rempt on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @07:57
|
Actually, the name is part of the logo design, that's why it's colored and styled similar to the symbol.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Martin Fitzpatrick on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @08:07
|
I think with the colour/etc. it would be recognisable "enough" if not for the sheer number of applications. But, I think part of the problem is that I don't have a clear understanding myself of the difference between all the applications and what I would use a particular one for. It's especially the case in the graphics apps (partly also as the names don't give a clue).
Mostly ignorance on my part: But is there an "introduction/startup/use this to do this" guide with KOffice? Genuine question.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Thomas Walther on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @08:56
|
I'm sorry to say so but I agree with all you said.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by sulla on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @09:02
|
I fully agree!
The logos are cute, no question. They all obviously belong together fine.
But the symbolism does not remind me at all of what the applications are about.
For example
* a small mathematical symbol (like x²) in a circle for KFormula
* a Pencil in a circle for Krita
* horizontal "Gantt-like" bars for KPlato
* a tiny chart for KChart
* a hard disk - symbol for Kexi
* a small table for KSpread
* a tiny beamer for KPresenter
* a pen for Kword (o.k. everybody uses a pen... ;-)), curves for Karbon.
All that could be doable with the same or similar line styles and thicknesses and coloring, to retain the general look.
All of that in a circle, of course, and with the name of the application along with it!
Probably this might be a suggestion to use as ICONS, eventually.
Why are logos and icons different animals? Look at Amarok!
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by BATONAC on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @09:09
|
Rock on sulla! I fully agree with this post. All of it.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by framie on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @12:10
|
I fully agree too. Without something more, the icons don't mean anything to me and I couldn't understand what app I'm supposed to use for a given task.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Totally agree with Sulla's suggestions
by AD on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @15:24
|
Rock on!!! Great suggestions.
Can we do it that way, - pllleeeeeeaaaaassssee!!! :)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by anon on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @16:42
|
I completely agree
the logo's hold no meaning to the applications they are meant to be about. I do not use Koffice, and if I saw these logo's they would not inspire me to look into it, they are logo's that I would simply just ignore.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Oscar on Saturday 19/Apr/2008, @13:51
|
The application brings meaning to the icons, not the other way around. The triangular red thingy that PDF has as it's icon isn't immediatly obvious what it is.
Personally I think the icons are beautiful and think that they should be used wherever possible. Well thought out and nice looking.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by hgj on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @16:42
|
Don't agree. Not every icon has to look like what the application does. Think about logos. How does the coca-cola logo look like? What does the acrobat-reader icon show? Why does the kde "start-menu" have a icon with an "K" and not an picture of a small menu?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Dave on Saturday 26/Apr/2008, @08:12
|
Actually Coca-Cola is a very bad example in this context because the white on red "logo" only stands for _one_ product. All the other products (Fanta, Sprite, ...) by that company are quite different in shape, color etc.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Martin Fitzpatrick on Saturday 19/Apr/2008, @03:14
|
I think (mentioned elsewhere in the thread) if we take out the middle symbol (from inside the circle) and place it over a recognisable document 'template' they would work great as application icons. Example I used is the KSpread arrows over a page of spreadsheet cells. But would also work putting the KPresenter "Play" over a presentation-like page.
This could work really well.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Shadowfiend on Saturday 19/Apr/2008, @07:11
|
It bears pointing out that:
* Krita basically is a pencil on a canvas in a circle,
* A play button, when talking about office apps, isn't a particularly bad symbol for a presentation program,
* W is bsaically the symbol used for MS Word, so obviously using that is a recognizable shape (though the fact that it is shared between those two programs might not be good).
* The KChart icon basically *ιs* a small chart, it just has one line on it.
Basically, all the applications seem to evoke evither their function or their name (Kugar, for example, has a pair of whiskers, basically). The only one that is a little weird in that regard is KPlato (as pointed out elsewhere, even KFormula has a square root).
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Valerie on Monday 21/Apr/2008, @09:45
|
I'd love this suggestion too!
Yes, people have pointed out that most logos don't look their part (Coca-Cola etc). Then again, those companies took years (and/or millions in advertising) to build brand-recognition and for everybody to know what they are about.
Also, most applications and companies don't have a whole series of icons. They stick to one. There's a difference between remembering 1 logo and 10 logos. Anybody could see one of them and know that it's a KOffice application, but they'd have to wrack their memory to remember which.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Jim on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @09:11
|
> I don't like saying this (I realise dot threads are getting ruled by trolls) but the logos are very unrecognisable and really don't communicate anything to me.
> Please don't flame me. I've explained what I don't like, the reason why and have suggested improvements. Feel free to ignore my comments.
You shouldn't apologise for not liking something. I know there are some childish people who think the dot is a place that should be filled to the brim with praise and nothing else, and call people names, but ignore them. Not liking something doesn't make you a troll.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Plemo Broll on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @10:39
|
I second your well thought out comments.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Anon Reloaded on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @13:12
|
"Please don't flame me. I've explained what I don't like, the reason why and have suggested improvements. Feel free to ignore my comments."
Your post was a good example of constructive criticism - something that is all too rare on the Dot, nowadays. Please don't be afraid to post more :)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by rat on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @14:30
|
These are good suggestions, but I would respectfully disagree with your original point -- that they are unrecognizable and therefore not effective.
I agree that they don't necessarily mean much, and are not recognizable so far, but give it time. Think about logos in general, and look at all the logos from Microsoft (one of the best marketing teams on the planet imho). They really don't tell you much about the product. They become recognizable as the product becomes known. The only thing they have in common, is that they are unique and look nice.
Same as the koffice icons. unique and look nice. This is important when dealing with brand recognition. Once you associate the brand with the logo, then you can recognize the logo with the brand. Think about every logo out there. How many truly tell you anything about the product? Some, but not many.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Anon on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @15:30
|
I see your point, but I have to beg to differ:
Word looks like a W - and a sheet of paper
Excel looks lik a sylized XL on a spreadsheet background
Powerpoint looks like a Piechart which makes people think presentation
Access has a key, which is a symbol for locked/secured data
Outlook looks like a clock - since it's primarily a calendar
Publisher has a big P and looks like a Page layout document.
Even Office newbies understand theses symbols.
Icons/Logos should be self explanatory. Only if the company/product is big and well known it can afford abstract (albeit very, very pretty :) ) meaningless symbols.
I also think that Logos and Icons should be RELATED. That helps a lot.
Please no flame!
Thanks for helping out with ODF btw.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by rat on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @17:25
|
I think we will have to agree to disagree.
My point is that if I saw a yellow clock, I don't think I would have considered that it was calendar program (outlook), but now that I have seen Outlook and the yellow clock a thousand times, I can associate the two.
>Only if the company/product is big and well known it can afford abstract (albeit very, very pretty :) )
I agree here. No company starts out big. And few companies change their logos significantly (key word) when they do get big.
>I also think that Logos and Icons should be RELATED. That helps a lot.
Definitely agree.
Honestly, I don't know if I'm right or not, but imho, I think the koffice logos are very nice, and I certainly respect the position that they should look more relevant to what the program does, but I just don't agree.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Bob on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @18:03
|
> Same as the koffice icons. unique and look nice. This is important when dealing with brand recognition. Once you associate the brand with the logo, then you can recognize the logo with the brand.
I agree the logo doesn't need to look like what the application does; I would argue that it does help a lot when it does though (e.g. a logo that obviously looks like it's got something to do with TV will perk your interest if you're on the look out for TV stuff). This point aside, I don't agree the koffice icons are unique from each other. They look nice, but they all look very very similar. They don't look like object (e.g. a wolf, a dragon, a pie chart) that your brain will recognise and label, but random lines with random coloured bits. I could look at some of them, wait 1 minute and I wouldn't be able to pick it out from a line-up from other koffice icons. Most people are never going to be able to tell them apart. The amarok wolf is unique and memorable for example.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
I agree with you.
by AD on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @15:19
|
please don't flame me either, but I agree with the post.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: I agree with you.
by AD on Friday 18/Apr/2008, @15:31
|
Also the main post.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Thomas Zander on Saturday 19/Apr/2008, @00:11
|
One factoid that many people have not taken into consideration is that in KOffice you can start KWord and end up editing a spreadsheet in it with almost the same power as if you would have started the spreadsheet app.
This goes for the editing of almost all content in just about all koffice apps. So we are seeing that the apps themselves are just a guide towards your final output, or just that you feel more comfortable in one app vs. another.
This means that while the list of applications is long the difference between starting one application over another is not that big. I think that this is reflected in the logos very nicely.
Over time this concept will only grow stronger in the vision of the koffice team. A logo is something that will be around for quite some time, so there is some looking into the future included here. A logo is surely meant to outlive an icon theme.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Some suggestions
by Anders E. Andersen on Monday 21/Apr/2008, @05:27
|
Completely aggree with OP.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
